imnotb at gmail.com
Tue Feb 12 15:18:25 UTC 2008
On 12/02/2008, Harold Aling <h.aling at home.nl> wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 15:59:56 +0100, Vincent <imnotb at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I've elaborated on the signigicant advantages of g-s-s before, and I
> > they far outweight a marginal case as this. Realistically, how many
> > have xfwm4 compositing enabled? It's not like it's that much lighter
> > Compiz, while it's far less feature rich. It might be more stable but
> > people enabling compositing are willing to compromise stability for
> > features.
> Everyone I know that uses Xfce/Xubuntu has the compositor enabled. But
> again, they all have fast, modern computers.
Really? And they (how many?) know about Compiz, have considered it and
decided against it? I didn't expect that, actually.
As soon as a novice Xfce user will discover the window shading option, the
> user will turn it on because it is way more visually appealing and gives a
> nice and helpful (fake) 3D representation of your stacked windows.
Comparing Compiz' hardware rendering vs. Xfwm4' software rendering is a bit
> weird though.
You mean that turning on xfwm's effects are easier to enable?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the xubuntu-devel